Globe & Mail "loves" born-again Christians

[Montgomery Burns]

That oh so tolerant leftwing media

Christmas is fast approaching, and with it, the dilemma of what to give the less likable people in our lives: office mates, ex-spouses, born-again Christians.

Pure class.

I'm not even religious and I find this despicable. :angry:

[sharkman]

The Globe and Mail is just a shining example of objectivity isn't it? They actually phoned me recently with an offer to take their paper. Couldn't get it through their liberal addled head that their bias could be objectionable to some. And they get away with this nonsense time and time again. Good find, Monty.

[scribblet]

The Globe and Mail is just a shining example of objectivity isn't it?  They actually phoned me recently with an offer to take their paper.  Couldn't get it through their liberal addled head that their bias could be objectionable to some.  And they get away with this nonsense time and time again.  Good find, Monty.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Geez, that pretty bad even for the G & M, write to them and complain, I'm doing it now.

[tml12]

That oh so tolerant leftwing media

Christmas is fast approaching, and with it, the dilemma of what to give the less likable people in our lives: office mates, ex-spouses, born-again Christians.

Pure class.

I'm not even religious and I find this despicable. :angry:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is the life in Toronto, eh?

And the Globe was making such strides (I am a former subscriber).

NOT anymore...

[Montgomery Burns]

It gets even more bizarre. The writer is reviewing a book on alcoholic drinks, but upon scrolling down to end of the article, one sees this:

Jessica Warner is a research scientist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

[sharkman]

Check this out, I was watching the CTV news at supper tonight and the story of the Christians who were hostages came up and the CTV called them Christian Activists! They are there because of goodwill to help the Iraqis under an organization, I believe, called Peacemakers. This is the kind of bias that keeps showing up all over.

[Black Dog]

You morons. First: the article is a book review, and the lione is clearly a joke.

Next:

Check this out, I was watching the CTV news at supper tonight and the story of the Christians who were hostages came up and the CTV called them Christian Activists! They are there because of goodwill to help the Iraqis under an organization, I believe, called Peacemakers. This is the kind of bias that keeps showing up all over.

Yeah, how dare they refer to members of a group called Christian Peacemaker Teams as Chirstians....

[PocketRocket]

Talk about making mountains from molehills.

I read the article cited, and my first impression by the line quoted was that is is, like Black Dog said, a joke.

Hardly offensive, except perhaps to some born-again Christian who has no sense of humor.

Perhaps MONTY would have been happier if it substituted "Liberal" for "Born-again Christian".

I guess THAT would have been okay.

[Black Dog]

If it had read "Jehovah's Witnesses" instead of born-againChristians, no one would have batted an eye.

[Montgomery Burns]

Ahh yes. Likening born-again Christians to ex-spouses and calling them the less likeable people in your life is merely "a joke". And you are a "moron" if you can't see this. After all, it is only a book review. That excuses everything.

But if the G&M made a slur like this against Muslims, the lefties would be screaming "hate-filled rightwingers"!

[Montgomery Burns]

Check this out, I was watching the CTV news at supper tonight and the story of the Christians who were hostages came up and the CTV called them Christian Activists!  They are there because of goodwill to help the Iraqis under an organization, I believe, called Peacemakers.  This is the kind of bias that keeps showing up all over.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not even sure that they are Christians:

Christian Peacemaker Teams does not consider itself a fundamentalist organization, a spokeswoman said.

“We are very strict about this: We do not do any evangelism, we are not missionaries,” Jessica Phillips told The Associated Press in Chicago. “Our interest is to bring an end to the violence and destruction of civilian life in Iraq.”

The group’s first activists went to Iraq in 2002, six months before the U.S.-led invasion, Phillips said, adding that a main mission since the invasion has been documenting alleged human rights abuses by U.S. forces. (but not human rights abuses by the terrorists--MB)

[sharkman]

You morons. First: the article is a book review, and the lione is clearly a joke.

Next:

Check this out, I was watching the CTV news at supper tonight and the story of the Christians who were hostages came up and the CTV called them Christian Activists! They are there because of goodwill to help the Iraqis under an organization, I believe, called Peacemakers. This is the kind of bias that keeps showing up all over.

Yeah, how dare they refer to members of a group called Christian Peacemaker Teams as Chirstians....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apparently you missed my point. Calling them Christians if they are is okay with me. Calling them activists when they are clearly not shows anti Christian bias.

[Black Dog]

Apparently you missed my point. Calling them Christians if they are is okay with me. Calling them activists when they are clearly not shows anti Christian bias.

But they are activists.

Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of nonviolent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations. CPT projects connect intimately with the spiritual lives of constituent congregations.

(From the CPT website)

They are also Christians. Hence: "Christian activists".

[sharkman]

But they are activists.

Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) offers an organized, nonviolent alternative to war and other forms of lethal inter-group conflict. CPT provides organizational support to persons committed to faith-based nonviolent alternatives in situations where lethal conflict is an immediate reality or is supported by public policy. CPT seeks to enlist the response of the whole church in conscientious objection to war, and in the development of nonviolent institutions, skills and training for intervention in conflict situations. CPT projects connect intimately with the spiritual lives of constituent congregations.

(From the CPT website)

They are also Christians. Hence: "Christian activists".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But they are not activists. They take no sides and only try to help. If they were missionaries you would get no argument from me. No other News organization I have heard thus far has called them that, so even the CBC might disagree with you. Even a later report on CTV did not stoop to such reporting. But your mindset is common among some who do not understand Christianity except from afar.

[Black Dog]

But they are not activists. They take no sides and only try to help.

Dude: activists aren't necessarily partisan. And I'm willing to bet that if you looked at their website (complete with photos of CPTmembers blocking IDF soldiers from firing on Palestinians, and statements decrying U.S. abuse of Iraqi detainees), you'd change your tune.

The problem is you can't seem to get your head around the idea that "Christian activist" isn't a derogatory term per se. In the context of the CPT, it's entirely apt.

But your mindset is common among some who do not understand Christianity except from afar.

What mindset is that, pray tell?

[sharkman]

Well, you find nothing wrong with a national paper making fun of Christians and then find nothing wrong with a newscast that is the only one found to have reported the hostages as christian activists(which is in itself telling, since no other reference has been made to their 'activism'). It's a mindset that doesn't see anything wrong with belittling or marginalizing a certain minority in Canada.

Although, maybe I'm wrong. Tell me, what comments made by a newscast on christians would you find offensive?

[Black Dog]

Well, you find nothing wrong with a national paper making fun of Christians and then find nothing wrong with a newscast that is the only one found to have reported the hostages as christian activists(which is in itself telling, since no other reference has been made to their 'activism'). It's a mindset that doesn't see anything wrong with belittling or marginalizing a certain minority in Canada.

Correction: I fail to see a single joke about born-again Christians as being indicative of a bias against them or part of a larger conspiracy by the media to deride anyone of the Christian faith. Nor do I find the characterization of a group of self described Christians (face it: if they weren't avowedly Christian, you would never be defending them) engaged in "nonviolent direct action" as activists to be belittling (and really, I don't buy your allegation that only one news outlet-the CBC-has used the term; in one CTV article up oin their website right now, the group are referred to as activists twice). In short, your outrage is completely misdirected.

[sharkman]

firstly, I've only seen it on the CTV, I said the CBC has not refered to them with activism. That you found it on the CTV site shows their still at it.

Secondly, perhaps not you, but if there had been some gay slight, many would be outraged. Try to imagine the G&M having in any article whatsoever a slight on gays. It'll never happen, and rightly so.

However, I'm not as outraged as you suppose, I do tend to worry a bone like a dog sometimes, though. I still contend that the CTV and G&M or any other source would never be so careless with a gay story.

[Black Dog]

firstly, I've only seen it on the CTV, I said the CBC has not refered to them with activism. That you found it on the CTV site shows their still at it.

I remain convinced that if this group didn't have the word Christian in their name, you'd probably label them activists yourself. And I don't see why you think activist is a perjorative. But then, i also don't see this discussion goiong anywehre but in circles.

And so....

(Oh, I just found this Guardian article)

The Rev Alan Betteridge, from the Fellowship of Reconciliation, of which Mr Kember is a member, said he was a "genuine peace activist".

[Montgomery Burns]

Apparently the G&M issued a statement concerning the intolerant comments made by Jessica Warner:

Ed Greenspon, our editor, asked me to respond to your email letter of this morning.

You are quite right, the reference to "born-again Christians" that appeared in the Jessica Warner book review on Saturday was unacceptable. We acknowledge that the comment, though an attempt at humour, would be offensive to many. We are very sorry for having let this slip through our editing process.

The editors who are responsible for the Books section, and who report directly to me, have been made aware of their error and regret their lapse in judgment.

In tomorrow's Letters to the Editor section, we are publishing another letter of complaint we have received, which, we believe, sums up the nature of the offence rather well. In doing so, we are drawing wide attention to the error we made in publishing the offensive line.

While the genie can never easily be put back in the bottle, we hope that this exposure, as well as our record of sensitivity in this area, will reassure readers such as you of The Globe and Mail's commitment to conduct itself in an unbiased, nondiscriminatory manner.

Sincerely,

patrick martin

comment editor

the globe and mail

I had to chuckle at the "our record of sensitivity in this area" comment. Remember that comic from earlier this year that had the G&M writers outside their offices burning bibles?

Oh well, at least they admitted it was an offensive comment.